The Structure of a Society

Shando, We seem to have different views of the state of the world. The fact is humans are now able to produce everything they need to live in harmony with nature. This has never been true in the past. Just 100 years ago our forefathers were unable to feed the world. Now we can feed a population 4 times as large as it was 100 years ago. This can go on and on-the idea is now we have so much more than our forefathers we don't need to work like they did and we don't need the shame of not making a living hanging out there. There are millions of people who have been made surplus by this huge advance while millions more are much better off. This is much like the social order of France in 1760 when everything was going well there.

<b>[Jim] "The fact is humans are now able to produce everything they need to live ..."</b>

Yes. Actually this can be done with a significant surplus.

But it CANNOT be done if humans do not work (AKA 'earn a living').

When and where shortages and/or other problems do exist, it is ALWAYS the fault of politicians and their cronies. Often the cronies are more visible than the politicians. That's one of the critical roles that cronies play in the partnership.

It's funny, but sometimes the cronies don't realize this aspect of their partnership with politicians until their politician partner throws them under the buss. ('I didn't do it. I didn't even know it was happening. The insurance companies are to blame.') Or the banks, or the oil companies, or &lt;insert favorite boogey-man here&gt;.

Crony Socialism is every bit as bad as crony Capitalism when it comes to things like this. There is essentially no difference between the two that is important.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Larry Burford</i>
<br /><b>[Jim] "The fact is humans are now able to produce everything they need to live ..."</b>

Yes. Actually this can be done with a significant surplus.

But it CANNOT be done if humans do not work (AKA 'earn a living').



<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I would add: ... nor will it be done unless people can 'earn a living' by doing it.

<b>LB: Often the cronies are more visible than the politicians.</b>

It has been my experience that for every crony you see, there are at least 50 around the candidate that you don't see. These are the people who run the political parties, interested in POWER and not necessarily good government.

<b>LB: Crony Socialism is every bit as bad as crony Capitalism when it comes to things like this.</b>

Agreed, and it seems to me that they share many attributes with bullies.

Keep in mind that not everyone around a politician is a crony. There are also advisors and consultants and contractors. They are for the most part honest people that provide honest services for honest compensation. (No one, not even a politician, is 100% evil.) There are also interns (paid and unpaid). And of course there are the groupies.

In fact, the true cronies are actually less visible than the politicians and the others <u>during 'normal' times</u> (when the cronies are busy converting their lucrative government contracts and statutory privileges into contributions for the next political campaign). It is when and where shortages and other problems happen that the cronies suddenly become prominent. And the politicians suddenly grow halos and/or have memory problems. I'm a bit surprised the cronies don't see it coming, especially these days when the fines are as big as they are. Perhaps this crony thing is SO lucrative that they just see a billion dollar fine as nothing more than another cost of doing business?

Jail time is now being talked about as well, but I suppose there will always be scapegoats available. I wonder how they decide who's next?

***

There are a lot of moving parts. It can be complicated and confusing, especially in the modern first world nations. (In the second and third world nations it is a bit more open - and brutal.)

But we keep voting for it so it must be what we want.

Regards,
LB